356 



90 



in Syngnatliiis is not single, an ento- and an ecloptervgoid ])eing present'; 2) that tlie i)art 

 of S.'s supposed etlimoid reacliing al)out from e. ni. in liis figure to pa.' is really the vomer. 

 Thus the palatines (in the adult) have no connection with the ethmoid at all. The "acrartetc" 

 condition, upon which S. lays great stress, I think (with Daheste, who many years ago observed 

 the same) is of no great systematic value. ]). 575 S\V. compares the head skeleton of (idslcfiistciis, 

 Fisliilarid and Siingiialhiis. As I have previously under I'lsliilaria (juoted his words at some 

 length and also noted some of the mistakes regarding Siinfinalhiis, I may refer the rcadei- to 

 p. 353 [77] of this paper. Here I need only point out that Sw. has correctly observed the 

 ])osition of the pterotic, ])eculiar to all Lophobranclis as well as the whole group here under 

 consideration, and furthermore some features in the branchial skeleton of Siphonostoma, 

 regarding which he says (p. 577): "In Syngnathus the lirst and second basibranchials and the 

 second hypobranchial alone are present; the fourth e|)ibranchial has gone, but the edentu- 

 lous pharyngobranchials, though rod-like, occu])y the same |)osition relatively to one another 

 as in Gaslerosteus." 



Otherwise his interpretation of the visceral (incl. susjjcnsory) skeleton is far from being 

 fortunate. Thus, not only the statements concerning the absence of the basihyal (i. e. glosso- 

 hyal) and the suboperculuni are wrong, but also a good deal of the description quoted below, 



which refers to his figure 50; the latter I have 

 h. _ , ,^^ ■ co])ied here, and it should be compared with 



my figures 4, 5, 9, 10, on PI. Y. "The true infra- 

 orbital, or rather the first bone of the sub- 

 orl)ital series (fig. 50, s. o.'), articulates with the 

 jKirethmoid (e. p. b.) above, and forms the lower 

 border of the narial opening. Ventrally it aj)- 

 pears to divide into two lamina?, lying on the 

 outer and inner sides respectively of the cheek 

 muscles, and is attached by its lower border to 

 the combined symplcctic and ])re-opcrculum (sym. + o. pr.). In front of the latter lies the 

 greatly extended cpuulrate (qu.), of which only the small part indicated by the dotted line 

 originated by ossification of cartilage. Along its uiiper and anterior borders lie three bones, 

 a, b, c, whose homologies are uncertain; b. and c. together have all the relationshii)s of the 

 pterygoid in the stickleback, but as b. is developed in relation to the vestigial metapterygoid 

 process, it must be the meta])terygoid bone. a. is probalily the nasal. The palatine is insigni- 

 ficant and edentulous." What S\V. here calls the inner lamina of s. o.' must be the sym- 

 plcctic (comp, my fig. 5 on PI. V); the combined symplectic and ])reoperculum is simjily the 

 preoperculum alone; b. is the entopterygoid, c. the ectopterygoid. That his fig. 50 is wrong 

 with regard to the vomer and mesethnioid, is already stated above. 



Hi'OT (19) describes (p. 211) and figures the cartilaginous skeleton of the newly hatched 

 young of Si/nfin. diimerilii, S. acus and Hippocamjms utillulatns. Regarding the skeleton of 

 the adult he more en passant makes only the following remarks, which he ought to have 

 omitted, p. 221: "11 n'y a pas de squelette oi)erculaire ni ile rayons branchiostiges ', and p. 252: 

 "Le squelette céphalique est en partie membraneux, en partie cartilagineux." (Perhaps the 

 latter statement does not concern the adult, which seems not quite clear; but on p. 280 

 sub No. 11 of his "Conclusions", which certainly regard the adult, is said: "Le squelette est 

 presque entièrement fibreux. On ne rencontre de cartilages nets que dans la région crânienne 

 et dans les rayons des nageoires"). 



Boi'EENGEH (4 a, p. 152 and b, p. 174) in the diagnosis of the (Iroup III, Lophobranchii, 

 of his Suborder Catosteomi includes the following osteological characters: "Præo|)erculum 



7^- syrrv.^ ap.p. 



Fig. 1. liopiodiiction of Swinxertons fig. 50. 



• Neither is the pterygoid single in the Gasterostei, f)ut liere anterior]}' only tlie ectopterygoid is 

 present, vvliile posteriorly, joining the lij'omandibuiar, is found a metapterygoid, whicli is ovcrfooked 



by SwiNNERTON. 



